Old WIP thread>>558448
My eyes are going to break
Just bumping on a dead board because people are still using the dying thread.
>>560857you are a champ
>>560657>SubtleThanks pal, had a laugh
>>560657>Subtle chromatic aberrationKEK; These titles are the best thing in /3/ by far.
>>560657damn I thought it was is 3D and I needed my red and blue tint glasses.
>>560657how did you make it so real? Is this an addon? looks like a photo but the shadows are still wrong a bit
>>560657Wouldn't really consider this done, but I'll probably stop working on it for now. Getting a bit bored with shading and want to get back to modeling.Grey material/wireframe renders are in the old thread.
>>560874You could add a subtle layer of dirt coming from the bottom of the keys, textures look really nice otherwise.
>>560657Dude i've come to this board maybe like once 3 years ago and I saw you post that exact same 3D model, jesus crust man move on
Making some first person hands
>>560891That's just the picture we use for WIP threads
Started this earlier.
>>560906wher chu get that misplacement map from?
>>560913it was a mountain height map that i inverted.. i think it was this one, pic related
>>560915I meant the pebbles :V
>>560919i modeled them...the bump map and the height map are just for the ground.. i modeled the grains and pebbles, scattered and lit them
Some mech I'm making I'd like to make a game with one day. Based on the design of the F117. Arms are a placeholder, currently trying to come up with ideas. I work slow as fuck because I work for an engineering company and am stuck in my ways so if it doesn't look or seem practical or functional despite how cool it looks I'm not putting it in there. A lot of inspiration came from that one destroid from macross.
Rate my mannequin, one of my first modles after being self learned for about 2 months
still working on the mafia jinx minigun for the cinematic remake im making
>>560911I didn't realize how rusty I had gotten, expected to get farther today.
>>561051If it makes you feel better at least you can do things like that. Everytime i've tried to make a weapon I miserably failed. I want to kill my fucking self.
>>560892yess grab da boobies
>>561032the animation test i did with the ingame model
>>561083looks like the normals on that ammo box are fucked up. Also aren't those bullets massively too large?
>>561083>bullets bigger than the barrelsholy fuck, /3/ is retarded
>>560978Live ur dreams.
>>561099Spend some time on /k/
>>561099but that's what the original looks like too
>>561099That is the original gun game model with a remodeled violin case
>>561088Yes, because its the original gun game model with a remodeled violin case. But the post i tagged in the gif post>>561083>>561032 is the remodeled gun. Yes the bullets are larger than the barrel slightly still, but im trying not to completly fuck off from the original design
>>560978so this is the power of an engineering degree... isn't the idea of humanoid battlemechs in general pretty fucking impractical to begin with?
>>561135It isn't. A human-sized mech, a robot would be ten or more times deadlier than a terminator, a tank-sized mech would have more utility against guerilla warfare, it will be able to walk in forests and steep places, jungles. It will also be able to dodge rockets, walk over minefields, etc. A small animal like mech would be very deadly against small cave-like encampments, for example taliban and/or vietnamese caves and tunnels.
trying out camera tracking in blender right now
>>561142>tracking a 3d scene rather than an actual footage
>>561143i plan to use google earth in my final video too
>>561141so why haven't any militaries made any yet? the idea has been out there in popular culture for decades
>>561154Because they have yet to find a way to protect them from chaff grenades.
>>561165How about the fucking power requirements?>inb4 nuclear batteries
>>561154Technology just isn't there yet. Think of characters like Aigis from P3 or Sahelanthropus from MGS5, those fuckers move with human-like fluidity. The best we can manage in real life are robots that move very rigidly and can barely readjust themselves if they fall.There's also the issue of power. This isn't a big deal with something human-sized, but then the problem of a joint system advanced enough to convey fluid motion at that size becomes an issue. You could make it bigger but what would then power this tank-sized and weighted monstrocity for an appreciable period of time? This seems to be something Kojima always skims over in the series since it's not so important to the story.Probably talking out of my ass here though.
random test with modular assets ive been working on recently
>>561083>>561032working on the bottle now
>>561171Chromatic aberration and noise is cancer. What were you thinking? I usually don't buy into the chromatic aberration is a meme meme, but this really isn't working out for you.
>>561176you understand that being against chromatic aberration is indeed a cringy meme?
>>561176>being against realism
>>561183What do you gain by showing your untextured clay render was taken with a shitty camera?
>>561184well im getting an effect of image being taken with an old camera. when are you blender yuppie noob faggot niggers will get out of your fucking shells?? you are running linux bcoz nsa is watching lemme guess right?
>>561190>I'm so cool
fucked around with substance painter.
>>561051>>561061You'll get there anon.
>>561173>>561032finished the above and this bottle, going to work on the rocket launcher now for mafia jinx
>>561195TFW can model well but cant into texture or composition... Also... crab are cool...
>>561238sorry for double post, wrong image.Same thing really but...
Mesh is done, trying to tweak the dragon's proportions to look cartoony enough. Girl on the left is the point of reference and what it needs to match. Big head, exaggerated features, not sure if I'm going in the right direction . Any feedback?
>>561242could you put a physical shader on it and not a zbrush fake shader, maybe throw your wireframe on that shit. and if you have perspective on turn it off, zbrushes camera is ass and makes models looks just not right.do that and ill give you a review, just want it to look the best it can as is before i say anything
>>561259Well, here's the standard material on it in orthographic view. I don't have Max 2017 so I don't have access to the physical material library, nor do I know how to make my own since I usually handpaint. The wireframe artifacts are from a shell modifier I haven't cleaned yet.
>>561238snibbedy snab. :D i agree the model is nice but the textures need work like you say. is this just a color texture or do you have others as well?
>>561242cute grill.>>561259what's the deal with zbrush's camera? it seemed off to me but i assumed it was just me. sometimes i feel like i can't truly evaluate what i'm working on in zbrush until i export it and see what it looks like in maya. the lack of smooth shading is a bitch too.
>>561270zbrush is a 2d program that fakes 3d with pixols. it was created as a painting program with some weird functions. then they realized they could do fake 3d and ran with it. its the reason zbrush can handle so much geo without freezing, its fake 3d. its why sometimes when you move or sculpt a part of your mesh, you can see the background through the area that you just moved a piece of your mesh from, but then it fixes itself when you move the camera again.> also why there are a lot of just useless tools in zbrush, bad UI design, and weird processes to do simple shit
>>561267Legs and tail look a little dinky for such a beastly torso. Maybe up the leg width by 30-50% and add more muscle to the beginning of the tail.There's also this thing you could add in the blank spot. I don't know what it is (a skull bone plate?) but I see it alot in dragons
>>561273>zbrush is a 2d program that fakes 3d with pixols.just kill yourself my man
>>561267the wings look too thiccthe transition between the armpit and the arm seems too soft, try to make it more angulareverything else looks okis there a concept for this thing?
>>561275its not 3d
>>561274Mm, I tried to make the extremities smaller to look more chibi. Maybe I went too far, I can try thickening them up.>>561276Yeah, this is the original design. I think I relaxed the mesh too much around the joints so I'll work on those, thanks.
>>561277This explains my confusion when I first played with zbrush and my shit was saved 2D.Neat.
>>561277>taking pixols literally>falling for this marketing
>>561281> Opening some 3d software without any sort of tutorial "just to play around"> not understanding how it works, wasting your time and fucking everything up without productive resultsWhat else were you expecting?
>>561286U mad bro?I enjoyed dicking around
>>561242I'd fuck that grill
>>561277so doing work in zbrush is just dicking around with super interactive parallax maps.
>>561294yeah, ive talked to a few of the coders from pixologic and they have tried to explain the engine they are using to run zbrush's pixols, and it really seems like they accidentally did it and were like... oh shit, did i do that? i guess its a sculpting program now.
>>561293>>561242same, would fugg the loli knight
>>561269Just an image texture ideven know how to go beyond that with cycles.
>>561295>yeah, ive talked to a few of the coders from pixologic and they have tried to explain the engine they are using to run zbrush's pixolsfriendo, you talked to a bunch of literal paid shills. Checkmate.
>>561305>uses a word>doesnt know what it means>doesnt respond with any substance at allheh heh heh
>>561277I don't get why this runs more efficiently. Are they sacrificing precision or something and calculating all positioning in 64-bit ints?
>>561307>>561282>>561294>>561295> Thinking that "pixols" marketing strategy means ZBrush doesn't use ordinary polygons This level of retardation is off the charts. ZBrush does have a special realtime rendering algorithm with some secret sauce that lets it display millions of polygons easily. And it uses this technology to render its 2d images in "paint mode." But once you enter draw mode and you're saving your work as .ztl (this is 99% of zbrush use) you're working with vertices and polygons.
>>561209I'm starting to fall down the rabbit hole of all over 9000 varieties of AK's. Guess I'm making a Type-1.
>>561309Then explain how Zbrush gets better performance than a lot of conventional polygonal modeling programs in the canvas
>>561312patented space age pixols m8
Take your Zbrush shilling and anti-shilling somewhere else.
still struggling with muscles
First project, be gentle.
>>561346>gentle>on 4chinsYou don't come here for gentle, you come here for soul crushing honesty that makes you break free from your complacency and strive to prove the assholes of a Malaysian silk screen critiquing bulletin board service that they're wrong.There seem to be shading errors (unless you textured the top?), so I'm guessing the topology is bad. You need to bevel the edges as it looks like a molecular razor, you need to apply a subdiv to everything so it looks nicer, your middle bit needs to be higher poly, the beveling of where the edge meets the flat top part looks off (the bevel profile should be inverted, I think; check sword refs)The usual workflow is to do a high poly model with detail, then bake that detail to a low poly model (if you're making a game asset, or want an optimized object for rendering). You can make them in either order; for this it'd probably be easier to make the low poly then make a high poly copy off the low poly.If you're trying to do a low poly stylized object, which I don't think you are, all your detail comes from the texture work (either by hand painting or by baking details from a high poly / sculpt or both).Oh and allow me to be the first to tell you: "lmao blender in [current year]! literally kill urself you'll never be anything just give up now also kill yourself again because you probably did it wrong the first time"Don't be discouraged, 3d is fun, just keep at it. It's good that you're trying to make things on your own, just understand that it's important to keep doing tutorials and learning. You can learn a bit by doing things on your own, but you also need to learn from other people by emulating their techniques.
>>561349That was actually pretty informative, thanks.
>>561349>if you want to post on 4chan you need to accept im an asshole n shiet, no offense but if you want to post here you have to communicate with assholes
>>561361>Exactly>welcome to 4chan!
>>560657UE4 is pretty slick. Just a primitive material inspection before actual materials. Also that grain is from a PP function I'm using, pls no bully.
>>561380Looks decent man, maybe a little too smooth(?) Like some of the plates on the body feather out into others. Also use white as background next time? :>)
>>561384Duly noted. Can be fixed.
>>561380Nice banding, faggot
imo CA looks pretty good on space renders desupic related, cba to finish it though
I have been learning how to do this for a few days now. I would really appreciate any tips on how to make it as photorealistic as possible. I've been following a lot of tutorials on YT and this is the most recent WIP.I'm using Vray sun and an HDRI map. Should something be lighter or darker? Should I reposition my lighting a bit? Should I improve some materials? Thanks for any help, I need to finish this exterior soon.
>>561457Just ask yourself, would you mistake that picture for a photograph? Probably not.Both the geometry and materials in this scene are way too simplistic to even come close.For a good (albeit somewhat outdated) introduction to modeling and material creation for arch viz take a look at the tutorials by Viscorbel.Once you have the basics down, consider buying Mastering VRay and Mastering Hard Surface Modeling by Grant Warwick. The former in particular is more or less the definitive tutorial on creating photorealistic materials in VRay (or any other engine - most of it transfers over). Once you've understood the concepts, you should be able to make damn near anything.They're all on CGPeers, of course, just in case you prefer beign a filthy thief to spending several hundred dollars.
>>561297pissed cause I agree
>>561032>>561210heres the WIP of the rocket launcher so far(the texture is so i can see the imperfections in the mesh by looking at the specular highlights)
>>561462Thanks for the recommendations, I'll definitely check them out.What do you specifically mean by simplistic geometry and materials, though? The house model is simple like that, and I still can't really "see" the difference between this and other modernistic architectures. As for the materials, I've followed some popular tutorials, maybe they are not that good after all.
>>561489As >>561480 pointed out, nothing has perfectly sharp edges like that in real life. Window frames don't line up perfectly with walls, either. Soft edges are incredibly important in CG, since they catch highlights more easily. In most cases it even pays off to to make them slightly softer than they are in real life.And those materials look about as basic as it gets. There is no discernible variation in color, reflectivity, glossiness or texture, all of which virually all real life materials will have.This short explanation by Bertrand Benoit is a decent (but still fairly basic) starting point on realistic material creation in VRay: http://bertrand-benoit.com/blog/materialism-1/For more advanced techniques, do take a look at those courses by Grant Warwick.
>>561504Thanks for that link too. I'm going through all of these (realized everything is actually available on YT).Btw, how would you guys rate exterior in pic related? It has the same materials as my render.P.S. I don't understand what's the problem with the frames. Angles are aligned perfectly, unless you meant that they are slightly inside the window holes, which I did on purpose, and which is probably a mistake then.
working on a model of my home town using openstreetmap data
>>561506riddle it with bulletholes and explosions at least
>>561509thanks, that's a good idea actually
what do you guys think would be good edge flow for these?
>>561505Foreground "plants" are absolutely fucked, so is the plastic tree with the oh-henry turds at the absolute right. The rest is pretty professional.
>>561481The loading rails (where the dynamite goes in) should probably follow a smooth curve, while yours has a bunch of faceting because of how you didn't space out your control loops.
>>560657Sup /2/? Where do I go next. I can make arms easy, but shoulders and hips are my bane. Lemme know some tutorials and shit.
>>561521Is this marvelous designer. If so change the marvelous mesh to quads and copy that. It always has the best topology.
>>561545Domo arigato image forgoto.
>>561551invalid response, thanks tho.
>>561238I used to sneak up on mudcrabs in Oblivion and punch them in one hit with x6 critical.
>>561142So is this attack of the giant Hamburgers?
>>561142its time to stop
>>561583The world needs to know about the amazing adventures of Mr. Muskel and BaseBallBatBoy.
I'm working on a t-rex for a game. There's something about him that looks pretty weird though, but I can't figure out what for some reason
>>561596tail too short
>>561601>>561602Oh yeah, it looks better now. Thanks!
>>561603why is his eye popping out of the socket now? the eye looked better before
>>561606You're right; I was told to add some more polys around the eyes but I guess I fucked up. Do you think this is better now?
>>561586no they do not.
>>561481didnt get to work on it for too long today, but heres an update before i go to sleep
>>561607The angry looking eyebrow it had before looked way better. This looks boring now.
just finidhed retopo/uv and detailingthen I'm gonna texture it and maybe animate any suggestions?
this is my first model, which I've done from start to finish.maybe I should make the head a little smaller?!
>>561707>>561708how'd you make the hair? a bunch of tubes that you placed then dynameshed together?
>>561457>>561505Not that guy but you should look up some simple window details (by detail i mean, a 1:5/10 scaled section drawing) of some typical window frames and how they sit in relation to a rendered wall surface like yours. They rarely sit flush to the wall surface and there's almost always a 10mm shadow gap between the metal frame and the rendered wall. Some general tips for >>561457It's an ok start but you're heading towards a very bland and formulaic style of archviz that is kind of out of fashion for most practices now. Try to do some research and see if you can find some more interesting angles and lighting. Dezeen. Architizer and ArchDaily are good sites for interviews, one example: https://www.dezeen.com/2013/08/12/henry-goss-on-architectural-visualisations/. Look at how he focuses on light and texture instead of just plonking his model in 2-point perspective against a backdrop. In comparison the two images you posted feel like they're out of some cheap developer's magazine. I dunno man just try putting it at sunset instead and cast some nice shadows, add some actual garden interest etc. In terms of the image itself, some technical things you can address immediately: Biggest thing that stands out to me after the above is the lack of interior detail, you really need to add some objects to make it feel like less of a white empty box. Just use some standard pre-built furniture and place it like it actually would exist in a real house. Also add some interior lights and some blinds/curtains pulled open to frame. You want a soft, warm, inviting glow from the house even during the day. Also the level of detail in your modelling needs to improve, as i said about the window details, but also smaller things. Like there would rarely be a white rendered surface, presumably plaster, meeting the ground like that - there'd be maybe 30cm of concrete base, or maybe that's sunken and there's a small area of pebbles around the house or something. (cont)
>>561715continuedalso your garden could really do with some work, look at the actual ground level building plan for your building (if it's a madeup building then look at some similar ones) and look at how the building sits in relation to its neighbours - it's what annoys me about images like >>561505 because you know there isn't a big plane of grass around the building, and that the wall on the right is likely a separating wall between two plots but they omitted the adjacent building to make it look like there's more space than there really is. That's a cheap trick and most professionals will see through it, it works on customers and that's why it's common but try to set a higher standard for yourself in your own work. Imagine how the actual garden would lay out and try to fit your camera angle into it well. Add some nice framing walls, hedges, trees etc to give the composition more asymmetry. You can do this in 2D comp as well if you have some nice high-res cutouts (theres loads of good websites for this, immediateentourage.com and nobacks.com come to mind). Your sky is also pretty meh tier, first of all the resolution is too low, especially noticeable on the horizon trees, and also it's a blue sky with white clouds over green grass - i mean it's so bland and formulaic. Try looking for a sky from your actual location - a mexican sky looks different to a belgian one which looks different to a beijing one, there's different levels of pollutants, weather systems, light pollution etc which all add an extra level of realism. Again if it's a made-up building just look for an image that's a bit less bland, something with a late-afternoon warm glow would be nice. You will need to like the environment lighting to your HDRi image, or manually adjust it to look similar, to "bed" the building more into its surroundings. I'm not trying to be overly critical, even if this is /3/, your image is a good start, just think more about what ties the building to its surroundings
>>561717cont (last one i promise)... and also think more about how the actual architecture works instead of just modelling white boxes. Is your white surface made of plaster? Painted concrete? What metal are the window frames made of and how does it fit together? You should also add some subtle weathering, particularly on smooth "modernist" architecture like this you get rain-streaks coming from the top edges, and glass is rarely perfectly clean. Don't go overboard as presumably you're showing the house in a good light but this can add another level of realism and makes it feel lived-in. >>561505 also shows you roughly what glass should look like, it's a lot more reflective than you think and unless the space behind is brighter (ie, a lit interior room at night) you probably won't see into it if it's daylight outside. Interior spaces should therefor come across a lot darker and as i said before add some curtains or something. Anyway sorry for the long wall of text but I thought you might like an indepth feedback. I'm a masters student in architecture doing archviz freelance in my spare time so i'm happy to help with anything else.
>>561718>>561717>>561715Nice, thanks for the in-depth feedback, I really appreciate it.Okay, I'll definitely look up those links. Just to be clear, I don't consider this finished yet, I was basically just interested in my lighting and materials of a building at that point.This is a house which is currently being built, the right side really is just an empty garden, but there should be some more houses behind it.The reason why I didn't add more furniture and vegetation right away was because 3ds max started crashing, but since then I figured out how to handle that.That HDRi image is the same as the one in this image >>561505It's free and yeah, not of the best quality. I'm just going through some HDRI tutorials from "Mastering Vray" with Grant Warwick, so that will help for sure.I'd prefer some sunset or night looks, yeah, but I have to find some good HDRIs for those, since the ones I have are just bad.Thanks again, there's a lot of info in your feedback, so I need to go through everything. I'm learning everything as I go, didn't know what Vray is 5 days ago, so yeah, lol.
>>561721No problem. And I know it's a WIP, that's fine, but some tips now while you're working on it might save you lots of frustration later on. As for vegetation It's usually easier to comp it in in photoshop later, that's what I do, but you can use 3D objects if your PC can handle it. Personally I do the majority of my workflow in photoshop (it's much faster) and only do basic environmental lighting/AO pass in render software but whatever suits you best is fine. Depends how strong your ability in each software is. This guy is a well-known staple of architecture students learning to render, I'm really not a fan of his final pieces (too many colour overlays!) but his techniques are solid and very fast, both to learn and to implement. https://visualizingarchitecture.com/tutorials/. In particular you should read this! https://visualizingarchitecture.com/6-tips-for-a-perfect-sky/ Note these are all 2D photoshop examples, you can always render your image with a flat colour as sky and put the sky in later, that gives you more flexibility. Also the HDRi isn't terrible, it's just the horizon line that is noticeably low-res, maybe try covering that up with some trees from a higher res source (again comp this in in 2D if it saves you time). Also notice the image you posted has a lot more warmth to the light than yours - the environment lighting has been set up well, look for some tutorials on that. Again make sure you keep the HDRi image and the environment lighting close - ideally you are using an actual HDRi file which will colour your lighting based on the image, but if you're just using a spherical mapped .jpeg then you should manually adjust the colour of the lighting to match (and don't be afraid to photoshop some colour into the image too) Anyway good luck with it, really take a good look at the site I posted and remember you don't have to get your render output to be 100% perfect, it's often much, much faster to put things together after in PS.
>>561709no I sculpted it, I uset 1-2 tubes for detailing. I tried to do it with tubes at first, but it sucked
>>561707>Band-aid is too thick>Neck thing is floating>Hips/butt area looks weird, maybe it's too short?
I feel like this car will become special to me.
>>561753I just made head a little smallerI'm decimating all parts for baking,I also waskinda thinking that maybe legs are short(?) but IDK.... I left them as it is
>>561708her ass looks weird. maybe the shape there is off or maybe the legs are just too long
>>561723Hey man i posted this not too long ago, any tips about this? Is this acceptable entry level work?
>>561776are you sure? )) bcz I'm pretty proud of my first butt. the pant's are not tight and I think that bugs you. PS: I made head smaller and legs a little linger ad exported for baking.BTW the main part is texturing her ow. because I have pretty cool design
>>561780Volumetric fog or something to give it a little more depth, kind of looks out of perspective. Be subtle, though,
>>561780What the fuck is up with your white balance m8?Learn about photography.
>>561707>>561708what's the poly count on that shit? it blows my mind that you can put tiny ass details like that stitching without your computer exploding. how much RAM do you have? i need to get a new computer
>>561781i think the problem is the crotch goes down below the ass. either raise the crotch or lower the ass cheeks
>>561780>>561723 hereLooks good for student level stuff, maybe entry level professional, but there's some glaring problems that again come from needing to look at more attention to detail:As >>561792 said, colour balance is off, it looks like you were aiming for summer glow but ended up with Instagram filter. Remove the yellow from the sky and add more blue to everything. Use a real photo of a canal for reference. Maybe lower the contrast a bit too. Some very very subtle fog as >>561783 said would also help. Look at references to judge how much!Lighting on the people doesn't match the scene - I see this all the time, check the lighting direction and diffusion before you pick your people! Particularly the dog walker, the other two look ok. You can carefully paint over them to change lighting sometimes. Specifically she has quite a strong light directly overhead and slightly to the right while you have a diffuse sunset light, low and to the right, so her head looks kind of out of place. You need to set up a Depth of Field, there are some things out of focus (the trees behind the building) and other things on the same z-depth that are in focus. Also since your foreground is not important you should blur it out a bit as well. Try to do this gently and use camera lens blur, not gaussian. If done well, this will immediately bring the piece together and stop it looking like a photomontage. Make the in-focus z-depth at your building.You could also crop the bottom quite a bit since it's mostly wasted space. I usually make my images in cinema widescreen ratio or near enough. Crop about halfway down the sign, maybe add a subtle bit of foreground trees coming into the frame in the left too, having these objects close to the frame of the camera helps to bed the viewpoint into the scene. Finally building model is pretty good, lighting on it is fine, the interiors are empty though and look too bright. You need a lot more reflection on the glass. Otherwise it's good.
>>561780>>561806oh just noticed, what I thought is a sign in the foreground is actually a bench. That wasn't clear at all and it's because it's not parallel to the riverbank edge as a bench would be. Either remove it entirely or add one in that's in the right perspective. It's quite distracting as it is so unless you really need it I'd suggest removing - maybe add a smaller one in the right direction further down the bank, past the dog walker. In general with foreground objects you don't want to place them in the middle like that as it kind of closes off the composition, if you place them to either side facing into the picture it kind of frames your viewpoint and subtly tells the viewer where to look in the image. Also a small tweak, the reflection of the people and buildings are good but they could do with being darkened just a little bit. Reflections are usually darker than the water. The right side of the building reflection is perfect, it's just the left side that needs it. Hope all that helped.
>>561786Is it a chainmail coif? If so it should come together under the chin. The corners on the front would also sag a bit under their own weight. Otherwise looks good, keep going
>>561783>>561806>>561808>>561792Thanks guys this is really good feedback, I'll work on this today.
>>561798you are absolutely right! Imust lover butcheeks a little. ty fir ppointing out. before I started zbrush I have not thought about anatomy nearly adecade. >>561797 Tbh my PC is nothing special. 16 gigs of ram, I7 3930K cpu(It's an old model but it's better than most 6700 type cpus) 9700 gtx and no ssd.I accidently sent it in keyshot, nothing is decimated. all subtools were on highest sub levels + maya was on. I thought it would crush... but it didn't even flinched. and rendered all these polys in 1 min... IDK man zbrush/keyshot is magic.... I t had no rextures and very basic material, but... it had like 150-170 mil polys.
>>561825150mil polys for that??? you that looks like 4mil max. 150mil you should have the hair and hair follicles modeled all over the body
>>561873I meant 15. but I really don't know how much there is,
>>560906Did you just go outside and take pictures mate?
Added bolts and a brake caliper
>>561891ya wana tone down your poly resolution there bud?
>>561893Half a million is not that bad right?
>>561894take a few 0's out of that and your on the right track.
>>561891>>561895I doubt he's trying to make a low poly model for a game, so why start with this polycount bullshit?Half a million for a tire on a detailed car model is nothing.
>>561873DESU it's quite detailed I checked now it's 38 mil but I lost detail when projecting from decimated meshes, because my file was damaged/corrupted(I almost had heart attack because of that) and thank "god" I had decimated subtools for test baking
>>561898you do know what textures are right?
>>561899I did this to bake normal-displacemet maps. + I 'm learning I'd be glad to hear any tips etc... >>561900here's your wireshair is not retopoed...
>>561898What resolution are you baking at. A lot of that detail will be lost if it's less than 4k per large items.
>>561901you have really decent technical skills but i think you need to go back to organics.maybe modeling something like a dog would help
>>561905to strengthen anatomy and scale length skills*
>>561903I split in two parts. body with gloves and prostetic legand second with clothes I want to done with this already... >>561905>you have really decent technical skillsI don't. this is literally my first model, I've done one bust before this (which sucks IMHO) and one robot Bust, which I like. first time retopoed. I'll get better forms in the next 2-3 tries. and I'm not going to detail things this muc for a while now. just want to practice after I'm done with this.
>>561912>when the guy thought you had technical skills>when it turns out it was just zremesher
>>561893Why in the fuck does the amount of polys matter for something that would be for a render? Why in the fuck does it matter if his tire is high poly when he can easily bake it down if he so chooses to make a game model? These are rhetorical questions and I'm calling you a dipshit.
>>561915no it's not a fucking zrmesher hahha I hope it was tho... I'm just shocked why there is no decent retopology tool yet... Zremesher is good if you use guides + polypaint + polygrups.. then playing with options, it still takes much time and then you should correct some places by hand... I was using 3d coat to retopo but now I tried maya's quad draw and IMHO it's the best. who thinks otherwise have not explored it fully
Cringe or nah?
>>561920Eyebrows would help.
Working on this environment for university assignment, we're supposed to do a low-poly version in Maya, then export to Mudbox to do details like the floor and scratches on the pillars, then export the normal maps from Mudbox and re-apply that shit in Maya with some albedo maps.Seems like a real asinine way to create just a couple of maps. Teacher doesn't seem to realize that something like quixel suite, SP2 and substance share exists nowadays so this sort of thing is really unnecessary. I don't know what the reference environment is from either but it was clearly designed to be held up with good texture painting, so I don't see a high-poly conversion of that going over super well. Oh well, I'm done with the low-poly version, at least.
>>561943Image reference. We have to send the Maya project, the mudbox scene file, and all the maps. A lot of boring, repetitive work for a very paltry sum of points.
>>561780the building appears to stand on top of a corn field.also, you can barely see the tree behind the building. how come you can see its reflection in the river?
>>561920head profile from the side is cringe. try separating the underside of her nose from the rest of her head, i don't think i've seen any anime or manga where they drew heads like that. hand is cringe, give her fingers for fuck's sake. side profile of the thigh is cringe, look at how fucking thin it is compared to the front view. look at references of an actual female body. anime tends to be relatively realistic (when it's not chibi) when it comes to bodies so your style thing is no excuse. arm looks fucked from the side too. look up references. it's too thin and bendy from the side.
>>561944this is disgustingmodern "artists" think they can learn one technique and just repeat everywhere without any change of colour, just make 2 colour palettes, "handpaint" style all over some low poly shit bricks and do a scene like thatI'm glad there are still studios like the one that made Pillars of Eternity that make pre-rendered backgrounds who are then retouched by real artists and look beautiful instead of this shit "semi cartoon" shit style that makes me puke every time I see it, I hated it in wow, I hate in lol and other shit games, it disgusts me and I hope that everyone that does this shit gets cancer.Games nowadays are so fucked up I stopped playing them because of that. I don't know what they are trying to emulate, it's certainly not "retro" as ps1-2 era games, even though they had handpainted textures with shadows and highlights looked vibrant in the case of "cartoonish" games and looked stylistic in the case of darker games. I can't point out what exactly is wrong with this style, it's not so much the cartoony look or lack of direction(everybody draws the same shit and models the same generic objects), I guess there's no contrast anywhere.
>>561982>>561944I(not an artist) literally think adding some black with replace color in photoshop looks better now.
>>561982Lol chill out dude, I understand you have an opinion but wishing cancer upon people for expressing their artistic values is a little over the edge don't you think?To each his own, I'm glad that you're glad that there are still studios that have the artistic style you dig. Practice it yourself and see where it gets you. Maybe combine styles and create something totally new if that's what your heart desires. I think that would be time well spent instead of typing down useless opinions.>>561944>>561983I think adding proper shadows would give it the same result
>>561982>Being this bitter
>>562050>>562057shit "artists" detectedwhy don't you fags post your "art" so we can collectively laugh at youAlso>wishing cancerI guess it's your first day on 4chan
>>562068PoE backgrounds don't impress me.for someone who played lots of RPG's in the past i would say NoX (early 2000's) have better environments, even wasteland 2 even though its in 3D
Making people post their work to invalidate their thoughts is fallacious thinking. ie movie critics don't need to make movies. Just accept that you're sad and bitter
>>561549>>561545make everything you can and then go from there. The difficulty of shoulders and hips is all in the topology. When you're beginning, just block out the shape however you need to to get it done. Afterwards you can fix the edge flow. Eventually you'll realize techniques to creating shapes that fundamentally have good, or close enough, topology to make the clean up stage easier.
>>561613in a real ram jet intake the cone in the center sits on a bunch of thin struts instead of on one big pylon. If you want your design to look like someone used a ram jet intake as a gun sight, it might look better
>>562103on /3/ specifically, there is rampant non 3d-modelers shitting on everyone.
making a lion. If I'm not gonna animate this model can I just keep the multiresolution modifier or should I make a low poly model and map a displacement and bump map on it like a good boy.
>>562111The lion would want you to be a good boy.
>>562109thanks doc, it's been a while
>>562111neat. i use multires exclusively tooits nice that someone is giving the sculpt tool the respect it deserves
Getting started on an ecorche
>>562111If you aren't using it in any real time renders, then I don't think it makes a big difference
>>562127oh no I don't use multi res exclusively, I use dyno top to get a basic shape and then reptoplogize with most of the necessary topology then add the detail.
>>562109from the reference
ah, fuck thisI'm gonna start a new project instead of finishing this one.but what do you guys think of the texture quality? the model is suppose to have a 1024 pixels but after i drew the eyes/finished the textures, I resized the image to 512.I think it looks better if it's resized because having too much high resolution on the pixels will ruin the simple style.
>>562230what are you sayingyou want me to make it detailed?
>>562229You should take a look at the Pokemon models since they look similar to the style you're trying to reproduce.Most of these have faces with resolutions of 256x256 so you could probably get away with a lot less. Especially if you're going to use some kind of bilinear texture filtering that will end up smoothing out the pixels with such simple features that you have now.
Finished the bumper
>>561890no, its all cg.. i modeled it. im glad you had to ask though, it lets me know im doing a decent job, thnx
>>562263How did you populate the pebbles ?
>>562263So the pebbles are mesh objects? What was the render time on those shots? What's the scene polycount?
>>561457oh hey you ended up getting the lighting to work properly. was it the camera settings and multiplier?
>>561920Is this what happens when you only have a frontal reference?
>>562242They only do that because lol3ds though
>>560859trams cant rotate like that, they mostly go straight
On top, what I have done; on bottom, what I'm trying to recreate. Aiming for a midpoly asset to put into UnrealUsing the Star Citizen workflow. Modelling almost done, started yesterday, probably will finish modelling today so I can texture it starting tomorrow.
only 1 image this time I promise :^)
>>562308waist and up feels to small
>>562308The body looks nice
some progress has been made. thoughts?
>>562303And what is the Star CItizen workflow?
Nintendo 64 WIPHope you like...
>>562324A combo of (google it up):-Face weighted vertex normals-Tileable textures + mesh decals on top for details.
>>562337>>562340could I see the wireframe, please?
>>562337Pretty good desu
>>562264forrest pack>>562266Render time was about 45 mins. a frame at 1080p with in camera DOF...
>>562308> fap fap fapseems like anon is a disciple of Danny Mac. I like it and where are the other images?
>>562390Congrats, you let your machine render for 45 minutes for an effect which could be done in Nuke in 10 seconds. Why not render with depth mask and do the DOF in post?
>>562303literally everything is off proportion wise and im seeing some stuff that doesnt line up at all? are you going for similarity as a test if so you're not doing so hot... get that similarity down first before you start modeling away.also the floor by the door on the left is beveled at the corners not roundedand why the divots in the window struts?
>>562308literally had a gf with these same proportions and same hair, but she was a dirty blonde and had white skin... good times...
Gotta finish the hair next.And not really satisfied by the fur coat, need to find another way to make it. Did it with nanomesh on Zbrush but it doesn't worsh really well.
Neko keyhole lingerie in the works just so I can complete the Four Horsemen.
>>562315there's something weird with that jesus. Maybe it should be a little bit taller?
>>562517you think so?
>>562308S-so, this is what a n-n-naked g-g-girl looks like?
>>561083This is pretty cool
everything in here looks like COMPLETE shit
>>562111got onto texturing my lion in substance painter cause blender's texturing program is ass. I'm new to the program and I was wondering if the normal maps baked in it wouldn't give me these jarring normal seams that I got from the blender bake.
>>562558>baking in blenderwow, that's ballsy sp have the best baker, hands down.just make sure you export polygroups with your file
>>562557So help by adding your creations to the mix, put up or shut up.
>>562562I did, it's SHIT
>>562558did change the thing on your image texture to non-color data in the node editor?
Made a pleated skirt
>>562611Not very shapely, which looks quite ugly.
>>562613I only now realized I got the pattern wrong. It zigs when it should zag.
>>561924>>561979>>562273Thanks I'll keep it in mind. Had all sides referenced though. Don't know why I even modeled it to be honest.
>>562630Much better, but i still think the transition between the elastic around the waist and the pleating sticks out too much.
How's my topo?
>>562635It's fine. Since bone doesn't bend like flesh you don't have to worry as much about topology. Just make sure you watch for planar sheering and you're fine.
More progress. Gotta make a cat collar now.
I finished this one by adding some textures. Let me know what you think.
>>562652Try to apply yourself and do something original instead of things that everyone has seen a hundred times before
>>562652Still no wireframe is what i'm thinking
>>562652Good way to learn the basics. Continue.
>>562653Anon isn't trying to become the next Rembrandt, he probably just wanted to make something nostalgic for fun so he did it.Not every 3D model has to be a cornucopia of boundless creativity, christ.
roast me /3/
yes, the goal was to learn the process and to produce a nice clean model from scratch.
>>562664Looks cool, could've gone a little more crazy with the lighting tho
>>562669thanksyeah, gotta keep the lighting consistent with the games atmosphereThe ivy turns too dark on spots which bugs me quite a lot but i dont give a fuck
>>562664Looks as if shit took a shit on some shit.
>>562308All she needs now are some jiggle bones and an SFM porn line.
>>562664Thatch roof seems a little bit dark and too rough, also thatch roofs have thickness (about 50cm), at the moment it's just a thin layer of hay and it looks a bit too fragile. also having the wood beams coming down at an angle just underneath the roof could look nice.would be nice if the lights cast shadows on the wall, and had a bit of orange glow. at the moment from a squint they don't really read as lamps, just as bright spots, so maybe make the metal parts of the lamp more visiblegrey bricks could use a bit of subtle variation from brick to brick, it's quite flat at the momenta little bit more clutter outside the door would be good, not just barrels and crates but maybe a place to tie up a horse with a feeding trough or somethingotherwise it's pretty nice, what's it for?
>>562695That is one short-ass skirt.Been reading too many doujins, anon?
>>562693Thanks for your feedback! Those are some good ideas.It's for a village in a diablo-esque 2d rpg
>>562696How about now ?
>>562703You didn't have to take it so poorly, anon.If you like short skirts, more power to you. Personally, I'd lower the cut around three to four inches.
>>562704I'm just goofing.The skirt is too short, but I didn't realize when working on the leg-less bust
>>562703Did you buy md? if not can you link source pls?
wtf is wrong with my building?
>>562714CGpeers as always.
>>562664>>562693updatefixed the lighting, roof, walls and added some junkimo the different shades on the bricks might be a little too subtle, thoughts?
>>562714>buying 600 dollar software for hobbyist and educational shit
>>562730looks good actually.just disable the background
>>562714I downloaded the latest version yesterday. Just search Marvelous Designer on cgpeers.
>>562730I don't like the straw. Too noisey. Same with the gray bricks.
Working on this for a couple days now
>>562764No idea what it is but it looks neat. Kinda looks like a robotic head.
>>562764sci-fi pyramid head?
>>562518maybe that is a floating sky house or something
>>562730Is this a game asset?
>>562764tis is some Sci-Fi dron thing? it could use some more detailing though.. )
>>562816Yea it's a head of a drone I'm working on for my business card, I'll post some more picks after I add some more detail
>>562825>drone head on a business card....don't do it... just make simple Business card, how it should look...
>>562832You think so? I'm not married to the idea of a design card but it's what a few people recommended
>>562841naw m8 dont listen to that hack, do something eye catching and shet.
>>562825>Using this shit on a business card...
>>562825>for my business card
>>562841I'm graphic designer(work as) like 10+ years... IDK as graphic designer, who does not specialize in neardy stuff, etc.. it should point to your name, e-mail, phone, website(if you have), socua media (if you have dedicated one to your artist or whatever you are thing) etc.... what the fuck is 3d drone doing there? + at least give it shape to support card shape.,.. but I highly suggest to not do itgoogle business card designs, it should be minimal and solid. IMHO. it can be done with the style you are doing, but it'll need very good artist to pull that shit off, without cringing everyone ))
>>562843don't troll him, he'll neverget any job and he'll starve to death or became a bum an it'll be on you ))Don't troll people to death
got my hair shader done and my fur setup almost done. Still gotta setup specular and SSS and then texture the teeth tongue and eyes.
>>562871Have you even seen a lion before?They're nowhere near this furry.Their body fur is pretty fucking short, and looks closer to something like velvet than that poofy thing you've got there.They live in the savanna, it's fucking hot there. Your lion will get a heat stroke and die.But, if you haven't gotten to scaling the hair back and you were more focused on getting the materials and shit looking right, disregard what I just said.
>>562874/3/ really needs spoilers.It's not healthy for me to get spooked so often.
Can anyone explain how / why my normal maps are so hugely different depending on the file types they're saved as? Pic related....
>>5628968bit creates artifacts in gradients. Jpg is a lossy compression, which also creates artifacts (noise).16bit png should be the best looking from your list.
>>562897Hey thanks for reply - I knew that about the file formats already, I guess what I meant to ask was; how are those compression codecs and noises causing the normal map to behave so differently (I guess I'm just referring to the JPEG versions - the 8bit PNG is the same just a bit less sharp)I mean - the surface is picking up reflections from entirely different origins on the two JPEG maps - the compression appears to have totally altered the normals.Is this.... normal? (Pun intended)
>>562877You've seen nothing yet
>>563002fixed that for you
>>563002but for real, turn the contrast up and get rid of that noise
>>563019what settings did you use on this ?Is it just contrast, the colors seem changed
>>563021Contrast, noise reduction, white balance and brightness.
my current project, still a lot of work to do